State v. Couey

THIS OPINION HAS NO PRECEDENTIAL VALUE. IT SHOULD NOT BE
CITED OR RELIED ON AS PRECEDENT IN ANY PROCEEDING
EXCEPT AS PROVIDED BY RULE 268(d)(2), SCACR.

THE STATE OF SOUTH CAROLINA
In The Court of Appeals

The State, Respondent,

v.

Wayne Couey, Jr., Appellant.

Appellate Case No. 2017-000709

Appeal From Spartanburg County
R. Keith Kelly, Circuit Court Judge

Unpublished Opinion No. 2019-UP-380
Submitted October 1, 2019 – Filed December 11, 2019

AFFIRMED

Appellate Defender Taylor Davis Gilliam, of Columbia,
for Appellant.

Attorney General Alan McCrory Wilson, Deputy
Attorney General Donald J. Zelenka, and Senior
Assistant Deputy Attorney General William M. Blitch,
Jr., all of Columbia; and Solicitor Barry Joe Barnette, of
Spartanburg, all for Respondent.

PER CURIAM: Wayne Couey, Jr. appeals his conviction for failure to register as
a sex offender, second offense, and sentence of 366 days' imprisonment. On
appeal, Couey argues the trial court erred in denying his motion for a directed
verdict because the State failed to produce evidence of a prior conviction for
failure to register. Because a prior conviction is not an element of the offense and
because Couey testified at trial he was previously convicted for failure to register
as a sex offender, we affirm pursuant to Rule 220(b), SCACR, and the following
authorities: S.C. Code Ann. § 23-3-470(A) (Supp. 2019) ("It is the duty of the
offender to contact the sheriff in order to register . . . . If an offender fails to
register, provide notification of change of address, or notification of permanent or
temporary change in employment . . . he must be punished as provided in
subsection (B)."); S.C. Code Ann. § 23-3-470(B)(2) (Supp. 2019) ("A person
convicted for a second offense is guilty of a misdemeanor and must be imprisoned
for a mandatory period of three hundred sixty-six days . . . ."); State v. Wilson, 345
S.C. 1, 5, 545 S.E.2d 827, 829 (2001) ("In criminal cases, the appellate court sits to
review errors of law only."); State v. Weston, 367 S.C. 279, 292-93, 625 S.E.2d
641, 648 (2006) ("If there is any direct evidence or any substantial circumstantial
evidence reasonably tending to prove the guilt of the accused, the appellate court
must find the case was properly submitted to the jury."); State v. Nix, 288 S.C. 492,
496, 343 S.E.2d 627, 629 (Ct. App. 1986) ("[U]nless there is a total failure of
evidence tending to establish the charge laid in the indictment, the trial [court's]
ruling upon a motion for a directed verdict of acquittal must stand absent an error
of law.").

AFFIRMED.1

HUFF, WILLIAMS, and MCDONALD, JJ., concur.

1
We decide this case without oral argument pursuant to Rule 215, SCACR.